10 October, 2003 12:00 AM
'The Catholic Church is telling people in countries stricken by Aids not to use condoms because they have tiny holes in them through which the HIV virus can pass - potentially exposing thousands of people to risk. The church is making the claims across four continents despite a widespread scientific consensus that condoms are impermeable to the HIV virus.'
I'm not wanting to start a debate over the Catholic Church and its view of contraception - however isn't this approach somewhat irresponsible?
The most disturbing line in the article to me was this one that turned my stomach.
'Sex and the Holy City includes a Catholic nun advising her HIV-infected choirmaster against using condoms with his wife because "the virus can pass through".'
As someone who spent two months living and working in an Aids hospice in a slum in Bangkok this distresses me.
Comments
Page:
Too small, whatever. They help. Having spent a little time at World Vision I'm familiar with the incredible effort made to encourage people in countries ravaged by HIV AIDS to use condoms. A country like Uganda has actually managed to slow the spread, but it took a lot of education and time. Time is not something these countries have a lot of.
Quite frankly I still can't believe this story is true, but I've linked to it. If it is, these guys have set back the effort to slow the spread who knows how many years. Totally irresponsible and self-serving.
Mike » 10 October, 2003 3:14 AM
If that's true, it's sick. I have no doubt that condoms are not 100% effective; nothing ever is. But so what? Anything that helps, helps. I can somewhat understand preaching abstinence rather than protection to those that the church thinks are not in a proper relationship...I don't agree with the thinking behind that, but I can see where they're coming from. BUT...
To suggest that a married couple should not use protection in the case of STD's? Holy cow, that's nuts! So the husband has AIDS, and the wife has to share it? Sorry, but this really pisses me off. This is not just "antiquated" or "old-fashioned," this is homicidal.
Sick.
Jonathan » 10 October, 2003 6:43 AM
Even though comdoms aren't 100% effective, they would make a lot of difference. They won't stop AIDS entirely, but they'll reduce the number of cases.
Christop » 10 October, 2003 3:24 PM
I think it makes sense to get the word out that they are not 100 percent effective. I wonder if they then advocate abstinence? It would make sense that you shouldn't put yourself in a positon to potentially hurt yourself or another. I understand people will not always have that kind of restraint.
Laura » 10 October, 2003 10:04 PM
Bring on a debate about the Catholic Church and their 'morals' about contraception. How dare they 'advise' people against using protection. Religion is a wonderful thing if it is positive, but i cannot see the positive aspect of disregarding years of conscious education to the world about contraceptives. And at no point was i ever under the impression that condoms were 100% safe. Let's talk reality here, abstinance? Since when has the human race in third world countries been convinced to abstain from sexual intercourse? Or even any country for that matter. We are animals, not plastic. Humans mate, for whatever reason it be, but i think that human instinct has something to do with it. I just believe that some people need to step outside the square they live in, and realise that not everyone is governed by the same morals or culture.
Lola Wolf » 11 October, 2003 10:55 PM
Why the attacks on the Catholic Church? They're a bit smarter than people make them out to be...they were the ones that established academic institutes and universities and discovered some of our most fundamental scientific knowledge eg St. Thomas Aquinas. They've been in existence for thousands of years, and yet people still cannot trust them on matters of basic morals that have been tried and tested throughout the ages and proven to be effective. These laws of human nature, especially that of chastity and preservation of virginity until marriage are there for a reason...if people abided by them (and it's not that difficult for anyone with an amount of self-control), we wouldn't see the rampant spread of AIDS that we do today. If the 'safe sex' propaganda is continually pushed, the only result will be heightened promiscuity and further transmission of AIDS...after all, everyone knows that condoms don't prevent transmission 100% of the time.
Ciara » 13 September, 2004 3:25 PM
I agree seriously with the church that condoms aren't 100%safe and i wouldn't advise a friend to always rely on them atleast let them try these 2 options :Abstainance and may be having only one faithful partner
vincent kibanja » 25 September, 2004 11:06 PM
I am an STD Educator to teens in our country but my extensive study of condom effectiveness makes me worry about the wealth of misinformation our young people are buying and believing. Statistically, a condom fails 1 in 7 times. Realistically, especially with teens, more often than that. People are too important to let them rely on condoms to save their lives. The protection simply isn't good enough. (Look up some studies where married partners used condoms for a year knowing one partner was infected and see how often they really do allow transmission, you'll be terrified if you've EVER told someone a condom would help them). The bottom line is this: We are not animals. We can control ourselves. If someone told me, "Abstinence is the very best way, but since you aren't capabable of that, try this..." I would at best be offended, and at the very worst, believe them.
Sue » 30 November, 2004 5:01 AM
am catholic, and iam not a condom advocate. As an NGO, who preach abstainance, what can you say about these views from our friends?
Bonnerventure Mutale » 1 March, 2005 8:45 PM
Darren - the statistics on condoms not 100% protecting people from the AIDS virus is not new. I've known of this long before I heard that the Catholic Church was using the information. It's information that has obviously not been popular. My understanding has always been that the virus is smaller than the microscopic pores in the condom's surface. So, to tell people that they will stop AIDS 100% would then be slightly irresponsible I would think. Of course it probably will slow it down and will be somewhat "safe" but to claim that they are always "safe sex" is misleading. It's not really a Catholic issue. This is the first I'd heard of them using this info. Thanks for bringing it up.
+ Alan » 10 October, 2003 1:41 AM